The 2014 Ford Focus Electric won't receive any changes from the previous model year

Ford seems to have given up on its Focus Electric compact car, as it recently revealed that it won't make any changes for the new model year.

Ford said it won't make any vehicle upgrades or changes to the upcoming 2014 Focus Electric, which is expected to make an appearance this summer.

According to Nancy Gioia, Ford’s director of Global Electrification, electric vehicles (EV) aren't worth the money. Instead, the company is focusing (no pun intended) on hybrids and plug-in hybrids.

“The batteries are still very expensive,” Gioia said. “The pay back period is still tough ... BEVs are a hoot to drive. That is not the issue. The economic viability of it is. We still see battery electric as niche. We think that by focusing on the plug-ins and that awareness, we actually end up benefiting both the hybrids and the plug-ins.”

Ford currently has three hybrids, including the Fusion, C-Max and Lincoln MKZ -- and two plug-in hybrids, including the Fusion Energi and C-Max Energi plug-in hybrids.

Ford has only sold 1,416 Focus EVs since its December 2011 debut.

This pales in comparison to other EV makers, like Nissan. Nissan's Leaf hit 7,614 sales for the first five months of this year alone, with 2,138 of those sales in May -- a 300 percent increase over its sales in May 2012.

A large reason for the increased Leaf sales is its recent price cut. Nissan slashed the entry-level price of the Leaf 18 percent to $28,800 back in January.

Other electric vehicle makers are cutting prices as well, such as Honda. Its Fit EV lease dropped from $389 to $259 per month.

While Ford cut the Focus EV lease price from $350 to $285 per month and even dropped the base price $2,000 to $37,995, Gioia said Ford won't make any huge cuts like other automakers.

“We’re not going to chase down to the lowest price possible — that doesn’t make sense to erode the brand image or the true value of the product,” Gioia said. “We’re going to continue to evolve that product — make it better and better ... We don’t see the need to push it like crazy and erode the image of it.”

Ford spent $550 million to retool its Michigan Assembly Plant for production of vehicles like the Focus Electric, C-Max Hybrid and C-Max Energi -- and even spent $450 million more in 2010 for EV engineering and production. The Michigan Economic Growth Authority also gave Ford tax credits totaling $188 million.

DOHC is actually an inferior design to the pushrod even though it is more complex.

Marketing has a lot to do with popularity of DOHC. 32V DOHC 4.0 V8 making 414 hp sounds a lot better than a 6.0L Pushrod V8 450hp. It is also popular in racing because of engine displacement restrictions.

The last part is laws. Unlike the US, the EU have illogical laws for engine efficiency using displacement as a factor.

If you look at the M3 4.0L 414hp V8 vs a Corvette 6.0L 450HP V8, it looks like the corvette is ancient. Then you look at the M3's 14/20 vs Corvette's 16/24 mpg rating and the answer is clear.

However, DOHC designs go well with I4 and V6 engines. Pushrod is unquestionable the better tech for V8 producing more power and flatter torque for its size, weight, and actual physical dimensions. DOHC can rev much higher and therefore you see them a lot in racing.

People get all riled up about engine displacement not knowing the difference in engine designs. Just ask them why the RX8 1.3L 238 HP engine makes gas disappear like it's cotton candy. That usually hit home somewhere.

WRONG. The RX-8 gets poor gas milesage because Wankels are inherently inefficient engines. I used to own a 1.1 liter RX-7 and that thing got maybe 17mpg if I was lucky!

DOHC is much better for any engine. Chevrolet produces pushrod vettes for cost savings so they can hit a low price point to compete against the more expensive supercars.The ZR-1 engine was a marvel and produced far more horsepower than Chevrolet stated but it was expensive to put together and required high paid engineers to manually assemble.Pushrod engines can be put together with robots, and frankly American rednecks don't know or care about the difference between a pushrod and an overhead cam.

quote: WRONG. The RX-8 gets poor gas milesage because Wankels are inherently inefficient engines. I used to own a 1.1 liter RX-7 and that thing got maybe 17mpg if I was lucky!

You're just proving my point that displacement does not mean efficiency.

quote: DOHC is much better for any engine. Chevrolet produces pushrod vettes for cost savings so they can hit a low price point to compete against the more expensive supercars.

So you're comparing the corvette to expensive supercars when it's at a mainstream price for middle class lol.You still can't explain why the Corvette pushrod V8 outshines the BMW M3(one of the best cars). It beats it in weight, size, power, and efficiency. It had a flat torque curve as well. Did I mention it is significantly simpler and cheaper to produce?

quote: The ZR-1 engine was a marvel and produced far more horsepower than Chevrolet stated but it was expensive to put together and required high paid engineers to manually assemble.

Yes but compared to what? Ferraris and Lambos engines cost even more to produce that kind of power, size and efficiency. You seem to have very selective comparisons.

quote: Pushrod engines can be put together with robots, and frankly American rednecks don't know or care about the difference between a pushrod and an overhead cam

now you just proved you are ignorant

the pushrod v8 is no longer popular because it's a v8. It doesn't work well as a 4 cylinders or 6. The world wants more efficiency by reducing vehicle size so i4s and V6 does the job.

Let me walk you through the design process. You set goals, requirements, and compromises, all while minimizing risks.

DOHC certainly has some advantages. But so does cam-in-block pushrod designs. You seem focused that there are no downsides to DOHC designs. That's not the case.

In the LT/LS/LT engine cases, the pushrod designs have yielded engines that have more power, better fuel efficiency, more reliable, lighter, cheaper, and most importantly for the Corvette, low deck height.

You can't fit a DOHC engine height into the low profile front of the Corvette. Ferrari's and Lamborghini's accomplish this by going mid-engined. Again, a compromise that GM didn't want to do.

There's no right and wrong answer here, you use the technology that best suits the design.

quote: The ZR-1 engine was a marvel and produced far more horsepower than Chevrolet stated but it was expensive to put together and required high paid engineers to manually assemble.

The 1990's ZR1 engine was actually designed and build by Mercury Marine. Yes it was hand built, but by standard factory personnel, not engineers. And only a few years later they had pushrod versions that made more power. Why continue with something that cost more and delivered less.

The current ZR1 engine (2010+), the LS9, is still hand built by factory technicians. Mine was built by Mike Priest at the Performance Build Center. I believe all Z06 engines are also built there. But the LS9 is a pushrod engine that makes almost 50% more power than the older ZR1 engine, and with better fuel economy and emissions.

You are also forgetting the Northstar line, which had 32V DOHC V8 designs used in many Cadillacs. But even with the old school different brand in-fighting, they realized that those designs were inferior to the Chevy LS offerings and began to phase them out.